Literature DB >> 9768368

Comparison of NovoPen 3 and syringes/vials in the acceptance of insulin therapy in NIDDM patients with secondary failure to oral hypoglycaemic agents.

A Kadiri1, A Chraibi, F Marouan, M R Ababou, N el Guermai, A Wadjinny, A Kerfati, M Douiri, J D Bensouda, J Belkhadir, Y Arvanitis.   

Abstract

This open, randomised, cross-over study compared the acceptance and safety of NovoPen 3 with that of conventional syringes and vials when initiating insulin treatment in 96 NIDDM patients with secondary failure to oral hypoglycaemic agents. These patients had not previously been treated with insulin. All patients used each insulin administration system for 12 weeks. Group A started therapy using NovoPen 3 and crossed over to syringe/vial administration; Group B started with syringe/vial administration followed by NovoPen 3. In total, 78 patients completed the study. Most patients in Group A initially found the insulin injections very easy or easy and many of those who found injections easy at first found them very easy by the end of week 12. During the first period, patients in Group B found insulin administration more difficult than those in Group A. Injection pain was significantly lower with NovoPen 3 than with syringes and vials (P = 0.0018). Patients in Group B reported a significantly lower level of injection pain after the switch to using NovoPen 3 (P = 0.0003). Acceptance of insulin injections was significantly higher by patients using NovoPen 3 than by those using syringes and vials (P = 0.0059). Setting and drawing up the dose of insulin was also easier for patients using NovoPen 3 (P = 0.0490). At the end of the study, most patients (89.5% (68/76 replies)) said that they preferred NovoPen 3 to syringes and vials. Glycaemic control improved compared with baseline after starting insulin therapy, with no differences between Groups A and B, or between the two injection systems. The number of reported hypoglycaemic episodes was very low and was not significantly different between Groups A and B, or between the two administration systems. No treatment-related adverse events were reported. We conclude that use of NovoPen 3 provides better acceptance of insulin injection than use of conventional syringes and vials during initiation of insulin therapy in NIDDM patients with secondary failure to treatment with oral hypoglycaemic agents.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9768368     DOI: 10.1016/s0168-8227(98)00055-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract        ISSN: 0168-8227            Impact factor:   5.602


  21 in total

1.  FlexTouch: An Insulin Pen-Injector with a Low Activation Force Across Different Insulin Formulations, Needle Technologies, and Temperature Conditions.

Authors:  Niels Gudiksen; Thibaud Hofstätter; Birgitte B Rønn; Thomas Sparre
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2017-07-13       Impact factor: 6.118

2.  Comparison of a novel insulin bolus-patch with pen/syringe injection to deliver mealtime insulin for efficacy, preference, and quality of life in adults with diabetes: a randomized, crossover, multicenter study.

Authors:  Nancy Bohannon; Richard Bergenstal; Robert Cuddihy; Davida Kruger; Susan List; Elaine Massaro; Mark Molitch; Philip Raskin; Heather Remtema; Suzanne Strowig; Fred Whitehouse; Rocco L Brunelle; Darlene Dreon; Meng Tan
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 3.  Pen Devices for Insulin Self-Administration Compared With Needle and Vial: Systematic Review of the Literature and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Pieralessandro Lasalvia; Julián Esteban Barahona-Correa; Diana Marcela Romero-Alvernia; Sebastián Gil-Tamayo; Camilo Castañeda-Cardona; Juan Gabriel Bayona; Juan José Triana; Andrés Felipe Laserna; Miguel Mejía-Torres; Paula Restrepo-Jimenez; Juliana Jimenez-Zapata; Diego Rosselli
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-06-28

4.  Needle with a novel attachment versus conventional screw-thread needles: a preference and usability test among adults with diabetes and impaired manual dexterity.

Authors:  Birtha Hansen; Søren K Lilleøre; Gitte Ter-Borch
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 5.  What can we learn from patient-reported outcomes of insulin pen devices?

Authors:  Barbara J Anderson; Maria J Redondo
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2011-11-01

6.  Comparison of clinically relevant technical attributes of five insulin injection pens.

Authors:  Toshinari Asakura
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2011-09-01

Review 7.  Evolution of diabetes insulin delivery devices.

Authors:  Jean-Louis Selam
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2010-05-01

Review 8.  Premixed insulin analogues for the treatment of diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Alan J Garber
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 9.546

9.  Does Device Make Any Difference? A Real-world Retrospective Study of Insulin Treatment Among Elderly Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Raymond Miao; Wenhui Wei; Jay Lin; Lin Xie; Onur Baser
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-01-01

Review 10.  Misadventures in insulin therapy: are you at risk?

Authors:  Matthew Grissinger; Michael Lease
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 1.798

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.